On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 12:04 AM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> ahh, ok, no objection from me then
On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 12:53 PM, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
> lgtm.
Thanks, applied.
___
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
http://ffmpeg.or
Hi,
On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 3:28 PM, Henrik Gramner wrote:
> Tested functions are internally kept in a binary search tree for efficient
> lookups. The downside of the current implementation is that the tree
> quickly
> becomes unbalanced which causes an unneccessary amount of comparisons
> betwe
On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 10:06:41PM +0200, Henrik Gramner wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 9:57 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > is there any reason why this doesnt use
> > libavutil/tree.* ?
>
> Two reasons basically.
>
> First, the glue code required to use a generic tree implementation
> ins
On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 9:57 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> is there any reason why this doesnt use
> libavutil/tree.* ?
Two reasons basically.
First, the glue code required to use a generic tree implementation
instead of one customized for this use case would be as large as the
implementation
On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 09:28:26PM +0200, Henrik Gramner wrote:
> Tested functions are internally kept in a binary search tree for efficient
> lookups. The downside of the current implementation is that the tree quickly
> becomes unbalanced which causes an unneccessary amount of comparisons between
Tested functions are internally kept in a binary search tree for efficient
lookups. The downside of the current implementation is that the tree quickly
becomes unbalanced which causes an unneccessary amount of comparisons between
nodes. Improve this by changing the tree into a self-balancing left-l
